Agenda item

Report DRR 08/082

The Committee considered a report that had been presented following a request from Members.  The Amey Contract delivered a range of services including: (1) Planned building maintenance; (2) Reactive maintenance across the estate; and (3) Facilities Management.  The report focused on the performance of these activities from November 2017 to the end of February 2018.

The Director of Regeneration, the Strategic Property Manager, and Mr Darren Nolan – Account Manager for Amey, attended the meeting to respond to questions.

The Director of Regeneration reported that Amey had been providing services since October 2016.  There was a process of formal contract monitoring in place and this had already identified a number of areas for improvement within the contract:

·  Reactive maintenance - the Client Team were engaging with Amey around these issues.  What had become apparent was that the priorities assigned to certain tasks were not always appropriate and this had arisen as a result of the disconnect between the Amey Central London Helpdesk and the needs of the local estate.  Discussions were underway to introduce a helpdesk that had an understanding of local needs and priorities.

·  The structure of the performance review allowed for monthly reviews which led to some issues not being picked up for a number of weeks.  This was being addressed.

·  Lack of proactive identification of faults and a reliance on reporting through the helpdesk leading to some faults not been addressed.

The Chairman reported that he continued to be approached by Councillors and staff about elements of the Amey contract that were not working, such as cleaning and fixing toilets.  The Chairman stated that he would like to see a Service Improvement Plan with clear timescales drawn up in partnership with Amey.

In response to a question, the Director of Regeneration reported that issues around cleaning arose with the first letting of the contract.  Issues had arisen with the TUPE of staff which had culminated in the cleaning staff not turning up to work.  It had taken time to resolve the issues with cleaning and it had been an area that required continuing management and maintenance.  The service was now moving forward and there was an acknowledgement that this was a sensitive issue.

The Committee were informed that when the services were in-house no systems of recording maintenance requests had been in place and there had been no formal performance management.  This had led to a lack of understanding about activity levels and had been one of the key issues in developing the contract specification as there had been no baseline.

Members expressed concerns with the priority assigned to certain tasks and the lack of urgency reflected in the priorities.  In response the Director of Regeneration agreed that some activity had been assigned the wrong priority and work was underway to address this.  It was also acknowledged that there needed to be an improvement in the maintenance of facilities.  A letter had already been sent to Amey specifying that the Help Desk needed to be brought back locally.  It was also agreed that in key priority areas, such as the Main Reception, an independent weekly walk through was required in order to self-identify issues rather than rely on reporting through the help desk.

The Portfolio Holder highlighted that Amey had got the big things right but that it was the little things which remained outstanding which caused frustration.  It was highlighted that the Civic Centre site was in poor repair and required investment but simple maintenance tasks needed to be completed in a timely manner.

In response to a further question in relation to cleaning, the Director of Regeneration confirmed that Amey were delivering a level of cleaning to the budget provided by the Council.  The Director confirmed that the contract had delivered savings for the same level of service.

A Member raised concerns surrounding the clarity of the figures in the report provided to Members and requested that for future reports further context and detail be provided to enable Members to drill down.  It was also suggested that it would be helpful to have more historical performance data to enable Members to evaluate performance over a longer timeframe.  The Director of Regeneration confirmed that there was more detailed information which could be provided to the Committee.  Members stressed the need to ensure that there was a baseline for comparison going forward.  A Members also stressed the need to ensure that the right targets were set and that performance was measured against the right target.

Action Point 18: That the Director of Regeneration circulate to the Committee for information the detailed list of issues reported for action.

The Committee requested that in future reports there be more clarity surrounding the pass rate for performance.

The Chairman noted that in other areas of the agenda Members were being asked to give consideration to letting other contracts to Amey; and suggested that if performance of this contract was not good enough the Council may wish to reconsider letting other contracts.

The Chairman thanked the Director of Regeneration, the Strategic Property Manager and the Amey Account Manager for their attendance at the meeting.